MaidSafe Dev Update - May 24, 2018 - Introducing PARSEC


One of the earliest MaidSafe quotes I remember explains how all the people’s computers in the world vaaaaastly outnumber the likes of any google etc out there


Seems like the mods from hacker news are maidsafe fans too! :smiley:

We are on the HN frontpage now!! (keep upvoting, commenting the HN post)

Just got this message from them:

We thought you might like to know that we put
in the second-chance pool, so it will get a random placement on the front page
sometime in the next 24 hours.

This is part of an experiment in giving good HN submissions multiple
chances at the front page.

Thanks for posting good stories to Hacker News,

Daniel (moderator)


Great update! Pretty excited to see the progress and looking forward to the path forward.

I actually prefer to not have alpha-3 done until we have maid trading on one of the big exchanges. As it stands today people have to go through couple of hoops before they can buy maid…


this is huge !

let’s try to get momentum by commenting.
can’t waste this opportunity

I found an old hacker news account. NathanC.
just trying to figure out something smart to say.
ready to comment. any inspiration guys ?

my comment:

All my respect to David Irvine and his team, who have been working hard for 10y on this, busy coding instead of pumping.
Despite all the skeptics and critics, he comes out with a groundbreaking solution, makes it open source, and even goes so far as to reaching out the competition to give them a heads-up.

just wow.

I mean it David :wink: congrats.


Yes, this is huge indeed! Was on the front page once before with our website and it crashed the server. :smiley:

In my experience controversial (somehow non-random) comments work the best. :wink:


Gotta love it. :rofl:

This is totally a face palm moment. :upside_down_face: I remember the constantant battles many of us fought in the past that resulted in little more than naysaying and disbelief about even the possibility of success. :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes: Downplaying everything we as a community were trying to achieve. Moments as grand and as satifying as this are few and far between. :pensive:

Let’s savour it!! :crazy_face:

To all that said it could’nt happen… :thinking: hhhmmmmmmmmmm… WRONG!!! :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

Remember that spanish crypto discussion with all of those disrespectful narrow minded kids!? – @Digipl 's battle --? Look it up. :smirk:

Here is a big fat pole of humility for them to suck on!!! :open_mouth:

The zen master @dirvine wont say it, but I WILL!!! :laughing:

Not . only . is . it . solved . we . have . now . set . the . STANDARD!!! :rofl: :joy: :crazy_face: :laughing: :smile: :grinning: :smile: :grinning: :hushed: :mask: :mask: :mask: :pensive: :smirk:


:v: :relieved:

:vulcan_salute: :smirk:


yeah, remember this thread ? that was so painful.


We should gather these. Place them in ONE thread. They deserve to go down in history. Let’s Immortalize their mental rigidity.

EVERYONE PLEASE HELP!!! :star_struck:

I BEG OF YOU!!! :facepunch: :laughing:


Not seen that thread before… but, reading the criticisms gives me uncontrollable and roaring belly laughs…


Ideally this means that an attacker’s nodes need to have done just as much work as 1/3 of the entire network has done over time.

Now PARSEC won’t be used in SAFE to let the entire network communicate and come into global consensus like for example Bitcoin does, instead PARSEC will be used by many small sections of the network to reach “local” consensus for the corresponding section of the network. The obvious attack vector here is to join one section with many nodes of your own to hijack that particular section. The idea is to make this attack infeasible by having the network occasionally relocate nodes (when they age/rank up), so an attacker doesn’t have control over in what sections of the network its nodes are located. If this idea works as well in practice as it does in theory, attacking a section is about as hard as attacking the entire network (all the sections).

Just like as in Bitcoin an attacker with minority hashpower might rollback a part of the blockchain’s history by getting a lucky streak in mining, an attacker here could get lucky in relocations of its nodes (it’s a random process). This means that especially an untargeted attack (any section would do) could probably be done with somewhat less work (farming) than 1/3 of the total.

What this ultimately means is that farming needs to become quite decentralised where hopefully no party will ever control a double digit percentage of the vaults (nodes) of the network. There are good arguments to be made why SAFE farming won’t be as susceptible to centralising forces as Bitcoin mining, but there’s no way to be sure of that in advance. We’ll just have to try and see.


Hey, thanks for the clear explanation. I noticed a couple of naysayers on twitter bringing this up and figured the answer would be something like this but didn’t have quite the info to back it up.


It’s a very valid question, proof-of-work is inherently resistant to sybil attacks while PARSEC on its own isn’t, so to tell the story properly the random but deterministic relocating of nodes needs to be included.


Would have loved to be a fly on the wall to see the expression of the person coming up with the acronym PARSEC and realized just how perfect it was.

Great job MaidSafe, next Safe devcon will be something else.


So it’s basically a combination of PARSEC, node aging, close group consensus, datachains, XOR based networking, chunking, self encryption, auto authentication and cryptography that make it secure to most known attacks. Sort of strength in depth.


I am again going to ask a silly question again so apologies in advance but I am a keen follower of this project and like to clarify things along the way from a non-technical perspective.

Will PERSEC implementation in other projects like DAG, IOTA etc help maidsafe coin? or is it non-dependant ie anyone can use PERSEC with no effect on SAFE network itself. I am just trying to tie the huge development of PERSEC to maidsafe potential price appreciation or are these independent events?

Thanks in advance.


Personal fave from that 2014 article posted above:

‘‘It sounds like they are reinventing Freenet. Badly. Not realizing how hard some things are. Instead, they make big claims. Where’s the code?’’

As many have said, amazing work, hats off to all the team. :slight_smile:


In Figure 1 and 2 in the paper, I see alice, bob, carol and dave. I get that alice and bob are standard, but carol and dave also? If not, I would go with david. Or are there too many of them? I know, not important, but I notice things like that.
Edit: David is an established option, according to wikipedia.


It is theoretically non-dependent. However, especially in crypto, hype and perception are a large part of the value of the coin. If IOTA all of the sudden made an announcement that they were switching to this new PARSEC algo for consensus, that would be a big perception win for Maidsafe, especially with the large market share IOTA holds. That, in turn, would likely mean higher trust in the project and higher value placed on the coin.


PARSEC is the unifying component of many components that will make the network function. Price is influced beacuse the project has been de-risked. It also sets a precedent for the industry because MAIDSAFE has created a new standard. This is already leading to new interest. The Open sourcing of PARSEC will draw even more attention to MAIDSAFE, and thus the price of the coin will follow.


But what if folks just get interested in PARSEC and dont join the SAFE network. Some indirect link would help in my opinion. I am just curious because if another company uses PARSEC and creates a solution for decentralized storage - that would affect MAIDSAFE and all the work they’ve done on PARSEC. Again I am a non-technical person so please excuse my ignorance.